MODULE CODE AND TITLE: SC111-4-FY, Sociology and the Modern World: Sociological Analysis I

CLASS TEACHER: Dr Carlos Gigoux

TITLE OF ESSAY: Religion: Durkheim vs. Weber

DEGREE COURSE AND YEAR: Undergraduate, First Year

ACADEMIC YEAR: 2012/2013

Compare and contrast Durkheim and Weber’s understanding of religion. Which one do you find more helpful in order to understand to role of religion in the contemporary world?

If God did not exist it would be necessary to invent him. – Voltaire Religion is a set of beliefs, symbols, and practices, which is based on the idea of the sacred, and which unites believers into a socio-religious community – this is how is defined ‘religion’ in the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology. In order to understand its purpose in society, we need to study the origin of religion and its function. Well, we could say that religion exists since forever, at least since mankind tried to explain the extraordinary things that are happening in their lives. Durkheim argued that in the centre of religion are “things that surpass the limits of our knowledge”. He also asserts that human being define their life according to two terms: sacred and profane. The core of all religious beliefs is differentiating these two from one another. Therefore it can be said that religion is a “social institution involving beliefs and practices based upon a conception of the sacred.” (Macionis and Plummer, 2002: 462) Generally, there are two different theories in the sociology of religion, in contrast with each other : those of Durkheim and Weber. Both of them developed important statements in terms of sociology and put the foundations in understanding modern life. To enlighten the role of religion nowadays it is necessary to analyse Durkheim and Weber’s understandings. Émile Durkheim (1858-1917), was a French sociologist, a powerful intellectual force whose work was concentrated around what holds society together. Even if he published works on various disciplines, Durkheim tried to make a difference between sociology and the other subjects related to it, seeing sociology as a science in its own right. Using this new science his leading purpose was to “help France overcome its version of the general European crisis that he boldly defined as history’s greatest moral crisis”. (Stones, 2008: 77) In Durkheim’s vision, society as a whole can be seen as an entity with “an existence and power of its own beyond the life of any individual” (Macionis and Plummer; 2002: 463). Because society strongly influences its members and their actions, shaping their life, Durkheim envisions God as society hypostasized. “Society is worshiped therefore is God” – this assertion comes from Durkheim’s opinion that people, in religious life, worship the overwhelming power of their society, therefore what is celebrated must be God. Furthermore, this idea explains the transformation of particular objects into “sacred symbols of collective life” (Macionis and Plummer; 2002: 463). This object defined as sacred is named by Durkheim totem. The totem spiritually represents the power of society to bring people into a strong community. Durkheim highlighted three important functions of religion in society: social cohesion, social control and providing meaning and purpose. Social cohesion refers to religion bringing people together via shared social facts (norms, values, structures, symbols). Moreover, religion celebrates the fundamental experience of love. All the connections between people in a society, moral or emotional, are emphasized by their religious life. Social control is established through religious justification (for example the habits related to marriage and reproduction). Using religion is easier for the political system to control the masses. When Europe was in monarchy, kings used to pretend that they rule by divine right. Nowadays, political leaders are not so...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...A religion can be seen as a unified system of beliefs and practices which are relative to sacred things and beliefs (Giddens 1972, p.224). It can shape ones thoughts and feelings and gives people a sense of hope and something to believe in. All three main sociologist writers Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offer different perspectives on religion and how important it is to society. Some of the theorists chose to have a positive view whilst others argue the unimportance of religion. This essay attempts to discover which theorist has the most accurate perspective of religion in modern times. This is done by firstly explaining the basic ideas regarding to religion put forward by Marx, Weber and Durkheim. Then both Marx's and Durkheim's thought will be compared and contrasted in order to determine the differences and similarities between their ideas. Finally, it will be explained which one of the theorists views and ideas are the most relevant to contemporary times and why.
Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx and Max Weber all offer a wide array of thoughts and ideas regarding to religion. Firstly, Emile Durkheim's views of religion will be explained. Durkheim chose to adopt the idea that if religion gave birth to everything essential in society it is because society...

...Emile Durkheim, famous French sociologist and philosopher, spent a lot of his years trying to identify why religion was so important to people around the world. After studying religion for many years, he published his first book on the subject which was titled The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. The book was written with the sole purpose of analyzing the concept of religion and why it is such a huge social phenomenon which affects the life of millions of people around the world every day. The fundamental reason behind why Durkheim decided to write a book was so that he could identify where religion originated from and what its functions are in the society. He was of the opinion that religion was a source of fellowship and unanimity. He also wanted to study different religions around the world which lie in different cultures. The reason why he wanted to do was because he aimed to identify how each religion differed from the other and if possible, what aspects or elements of religion had consistency with each other. His primary aim, therefore, was to establish certain empirical data over how some social aspects of religion are common throughout the world and how they even go so far as to surpass the concept of an Almighty God.
In his book, Durkheim defined religion as being a unified set of...

...
We link Durkheim with social fact, and Weber withVerstehen. Durkheim's writings led to functionalism while Weber's writing led to symbolic interactionism.
Both were "Fathers" of sociology, and wrote mainly in the late nineteenth century.
Both called for applying the scientific method to the study of society, and both wanted sociologists to be objective (although they had different ideas about objectivity).
Both contributed to the sociological perspective. Both criticised Marx, but in different ways.
The main difference between them was that Durkheim coined the term "social fact" to indicate that there were forces beyond the individual that affected their behaviour, while Weber said we needed to understand the meanings people put on their behaviour to understand society.
The approach by Weber has developed into modern perspective of sociology called symbolic interactionism.
Durkheim's study of suicide to show how rates of suicide differed between groups with different social characteristics, although we do not have enough information to predict which individuals would commit suicide.
Suicide rates are quite predictable, when based on specific social characteristics. Durkheim used this to explain "social fact."
The idea of seeing social facts as external to the individual was Durkheim's contribution. See "Inside or Outside?"
In contrast, we see...

...6. Critically examine the specific methods used by Marx, Durkheim, Weber for the analysis of social forces and relations in modern society.
Defining the concept of social forces and relations in modern society without assuming them as a derivatives of other sciences such as politics, philosophy, religion conclude us with the examination of them as the core foundation of classical sociological theory. Thus we will encounter with Durkeim, Marx and Weber’s conceptualization of social forces and relations in modern society.
The idea of totality is the common feature of the classical sociological theory even the philosophical backgrounds of Durkeim, Marx and Weber’s perspectives are differ from each other. Before, we must know that the main point of the totality is analyzing the total itself rather than looking at its parts, thus society itself becomes the central point of the analysis. If we develop a scheme that will focus on the key variables in analysis of Durkheim, Marx and Weber, these variables come out as psychology, nature and the religion. In the analysis of the society there are three fundamental variables: psychology, nature and religion that Durkheim, Marx and Weber emphasized respectively. Durkheim use psychology as basic assumption of his analysis, Marx use the nature and Weber use...

...Response Paper #1
Marx, Weber, Durkheim, introducing the godfathers of sociology. Three of the most influential theorists that are debated on and about till our present time. How have three very different individuals in history have maintained the template as we know it to understanding society, which has been over three centuries old? How is it that three different worlds and times in history, has had such familiarization not only for their respected times but a revelation to today’s systems and structures. Let us explore the minds and studies of the three men, and discover were they either Genius’ or foe?
Summary:
The “Manifesto of the Communist Party” by Karl Mark was first written in 1848 in a time where rules on workers and working conditions where at minimum to none. At the precipice of social and political turmoil in Germany, Mark writes “The history of hitherto existing society is the history of class struggle (Marx 2007: p.96).” Marx was elaborating on how things were and how things are going to be. In the first parts of his essay he correlates the examples of ancient times, where man enslaves men for the sake of material gain or economic growth. From Politics, religion and history in of itself are structures based to suppress the worker and is what maintains the so called Class Struggle. According to Marx, all aspects of theses systematic ways to which concentrates on the gain of material, economic growth or...

...There are many different perspectives on the growth of modernity. Society is constantly changing as more time passes by. People like Emile Durkheim and Max Weber both offer their own individual perspective on how the growth of modernity came about and how we have come to understand today’s society. In the 1890s period Emile Durkheim a sociologist, in France watched the transformation of society go from a ‘primitive’ stance into something more complex also known as ‘organic solidarity’. Max Weber a German sociologist on the other hand, his view was in regards to how the growth of government was a driving force in modernity to maintain order, organisation and administration of specialised functions. Both theses sociologists’ theories are interested in the social order of society as the core characteristic of modernity.
In 1887 Emile Durkheim became the first Professor of Sociology at the University of Bordeaux, even though there was no department of sociology developed. (Bessant &amp; Watts, 2007) In France there were many war casualties by World War I. The goal of Emile Durkheim was to develop a sociology that would help his country to conquer its continuing moral crisis. In achieving this he would encompass many themes of his predecessors such as Auguste Comte, Charles Montesquieu and Alexis de Tocqueville. (Stones, 1998) In addition to his emphasis on French origins of sociology, the...

...Scott J. Simon / p.1
Economy and Society in Marx, Durkheim, and Weber
The economy is a fundamental part of contemporary society; on that most
sociologists agree. Besides being a social institution in its own right, it also contributes to
the administrative, educational, ethical, legal, and religious organization of society; in
short, the social superstructure. But the dynamic of this relationship and how it is
determined is a matter of theoretical debate. The classical sociologists Marx, Durkheim,
and Weber (as listed chronologically) were the first to explore the relationship between
the economy and society in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; each developed
differing viewpoints based on their respective theoretical positions. As will be detailed,
Marx viewed the economy as the base that determines the social superstructure;
Durkheim viewed the economy as one of a number of social institutions that make up a
society, whereas Weber viewed the economy in part as an extension of religious belief.
Marx, Durkheim, and Weber form the foundation of classical sociology and provide
brilliant theories and analyses that are still debated today; all three agree that the
economy is essentially a social phenomenon and worthy of study as such.
In the following, the economic and social theories of Marx, Durkheim, and...

...actions performed by human beings. Through symbols, we are able to communicate with each other without having any face-to-face interaction. Moreover, some interactions we encounter help us build collective memories of ourselves. In 'Elementary Forms of Religious Life,' Durkheim lays emphasis on totem, whereas in 'Madness and its Civilization,' Foucault talks about the house of confinement. Both of these topics mention how physical manifestations can be transformed into a value of collectivity.
According to Durkheim, totem is a representation of a symbol. However, it is not merely a symbol because totem is described as" a representation above all of a symbol; which is tangible expression of something else" (Durkheim 1995 p208). Different societies and clans can assign different meaning to a totem. "Totemism is not the religion of a certain animals, certain men, or certain images; it is the religion of a kind of anonymous and impersonal force that is identifiable in each of these beings but identical to none of them"(Durkheim 1995 p191). Durkheim explains that totem is formed as a result of “evoking the consciousness of the faithful and can be derived only from a principle that is shared by all alike" (Durkheim 1995 p190). ). This shows that totem plays an important role in every society because each individual in that particular clan looks up to a totem if and...